On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Michael McKinley <m.mckinley at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Dylan McCall <dylanmccall at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Just recently I got a totally awesome 24" monitor. (Yay! It's a Samsung
> > T240, going up from a Dell 17". I can't get over how big it is).
> >
> > To my dismay, Ubuntu's default wallpaper was stretched way beyond its
> means
> > at the monitor's native resolution (1920x1200). GNOME's backgrounds all
> look
> > fine; they seem to standardize on fitting precisely that. It looks like
> most
> > other operating systems shoot for the same target, including Windows.
> >
> > Perhaps Ubuntu should aim for the same as well, since 1080p is getting
> quite
> > common in computer displays and will probably remain standard for a
> while.
> > It is a shame to think that users with beautiful displays are welcomed to
> a
> > new Ubuntu release by fuzzy, stretched graphics.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Dylan
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-art mailing list
> > ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art> >
> >
>> In a similar vein, ensuring that the wallpapers look good on different
> aspect ratios is important as well.
Just as we have a work-flow designed to make icons look good at different
sizes, perhaps we should have a mechanism that ensures different resolutions
and aspect ratios are sufficiently covered. I know I've seen a list of all
the different aspect ratios and screen sizes in use: such a list could be
used as a starting point.
>>> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
>ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/attachments/20090305/b1cdc9e3/attachment.htm